What prevented you from dropping an end-of-the-bench scrub and adding a TE a week or two earlier when you started running thin at the position. Not sure this fits collusion more than the nonplayoff owner being a bit of a **** knowing you were in a bad spot, but it seems to me that you were at least partly responsible for your situation. Also, doesn't your league have conditional waivers where you can load multiple players into a FA slot in the event you are outbid on the first guy(s) on your list? Or a FCFS period after FA bids are awarded each week? If not, perhaps your league ought to consider either or both to prevent this kind of thing.Mephistopheles wrote: ↑Thu May 21, 2020 4:52 am I actually do not think this is a bad rule for waiver claims only. Or at least some derivation of it. Here's why.
In 2016, I had a team that was going from worst in 2015 to first in 2016. Dominated the regular season, got the #1 seed, but I lost 3 TE's to injury in 3 weeks heading into the finals. Charles Clay was on the waiver wire, and I put in a claim for him for $5. Was outbid by $1 by a non-playoff team who happened to be good friends with my championship game opponent (my opponent had $0 blind bid dollars left). I spent the whole week practically begging the commish to revert the waiver claim because the team involved was not in the playoffs, and that it was obvious collusion, etc. Commish was good friends with the two guys involved and refused.
Ended up taking a zero at TE and losing the title game by less than one point. Clay put up 19 points in that week 16. The non-playoff team was run by an industry writer (I really couldn't stand the guy anyway) who should have known better. Four weeks after the season, he dropped Clay and admitted to me that he did it intentionally, but it was because he had my first round pick for the next year, and wanted to make that pick one spot better, not to help his buddy. Which was bullshit. Said he didn't think it would make that much of a difference. It was a dickhead move that cost me $400.
I'm always of the mindset that the teams who are playing for $ should have priority on waiver claims over those playing for scraps. Non-playoff teams should be allowed FCFS only during the playoffs.
As to dynasty leagues shutting out non-playoff teams from waivers during the playoffs, either all teams should have equal access to all FAs or there should be a moratorium for all teams over the same period. Dynasty leagues roster for periods well beyond a 3 week playoff period and some teams having access to players that other teams don’t is a clear flaw in the system giving the express domain of dynasty leagues. That makes no sense and should have been addressed much earlier.
The commish interjecting and then waffling back and forth about awarding the player would seem to indicate that he owes the league an open explanation to his actions, and possibly be held accountable.